Chocolate Cake and Sidebars has the synopsis:
Everyone seems to agree the rifle could not have gone off accidentally. But what do you think about that expert witness and his description of the gun? I didn't think he made a very good case for banning guns like this one. I can already hear all the pro-gun responses to his remarks. But, one interesting thing was the fact that it comes from Israel in parts and in assembled in the U.S. Is that a way of skirting some laws?
May 17, 2008, police responded to an “accidental shooting” in Fort Meyers Florida. Upon arriving, police found Amy Boscarino on the floor suffering from a gunshot wound to the neck. After an unsuccessful CPR attempt and EMS arrival, she was pronounced dead at the scene.
After further investigation, deputies found that it wasn’t actually an accident. Schack’s claim was that he adjusted the scope on his rifle when the gun went off accidentally as it fell from a dresser. Witnesses and friends state that their relationship had problems and it became clear that this was more than an accident and a resulting warrant was issued for Mark Schack.
He is charged with second-degree murder, which carries a minimum 25 years in prison and a maximum of life.
After deliberating for just an hour, jurors came back with a verdict of guilty of second-degree murder. Sentencing was held Feb 1, 2010 where he was sentenced to life in prison.
Another thing I didn't like about his explanation was all that talk about the velocity of the bullet. Why the interviewer didn't ask how that compares to other rifles makes me wonder if he was even listening. The fact that the round travels faster than the speed of sound doesn't strike me like something that should elicit a "wow." In fact it means absolutely nothing unless we know how it compares to other guns. What do you think? Do some bullets travel slower than the speed of sound? Does it really matter? Is that what makes this weapon objectionable?
What I felt was not made adequately clear in the piece was the question of why would someone what to own a gun like this? I know that question is roundly dismissed by pro-gun folks and even mocked by some, but I think it's a good one. I realize it's difficult to define a military assault weapon in such a way that ordinary hunting guns are not included, but the question remains, why would someone want to own one of these?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.